YYZ RJ landing Accident

[BTD]

When you can’t impress with talent, baffle with bollsheet.




Simple accident analysis…pilot didn’t flare.

Obviously.

Yet I was told earlier in this thread that I needed to have more empathy for the flight crew than the pax who were turned upside down and nearly turned into a roman candle. I did not understand this and still don't. Peoples lives are more important than any flight crews feelings.

Respect isn't earned by people like me unless you hold your own to an exacting standard. There is loads of incompetence (and far worse) in my industry (finance) -- and I am absolutely brutal in calling it out. So are my peers with integrity.

You must have a serious case of “main character syndrome”. I call only surmise that your comment is in reference to my post.

I feel for the Capt and FO, no doubt emotionally scarred by this accident and will be for a lengthy time if not throughout the remaining aviation career. If there is such thing as consolation for them , nobody died on their watch.

Yet. 3 in critical condition at last report.

I feel for them, and other pax emotionally scarred by being violently turned upside down in an aircraft.

Whether I feel as much for the Cap and Fo will depend on the substance of the TSB’s report.

I highly doubt they set out that morning to crash an airplane. You can still have empathy for those who made errors that led to bad outcomes. Doesn’t absolve their responsibility. But I certainly feel for them, unless it turns out to be gross negligence.

Not sure how you read that as “you should have more empathy for the crew than the passengers”. But whatever.

It’s okay not to be the centre of attention in every thread.

[rookiepilot]

It’s also Ok to ignore my post and just not dig the hole you made even deeper. When in a hole , stop digging.

They were negligent and crashed an airplane due to forgetting to complete an essential part of a flight every student learns before their first solo, and a lot of people are very lucky to be alive.

But I get it. This place is so over the top, crew can do no wrong, people would probably defend this guy and blame the child.
PS - The airline did blame the child. He’s still facing 20 years. Thankfully the courts didn’t agree with the airline.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/07/us/fligh ... index.html

But negligence that results in a crash, even when causing death, never results in criminal charges.

Why is that?

[BTD]

It’s also Ok to ignore my post and just not dig the hole you made even deeper. When in a hole , stop digging.

They were negligent and crashed an airplane due to forgetting to complete an essential part of a flight every student learns before their first solo, and a lot of people are very lucky to be alive.

But I get it. This place is so over the top, crew can do no wrong, people would probably defend this guy and blame the child.
PS - The airline did blame the child. He’s still facing 20 years. Thankfully the courts didn’t agree with the airline.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/07/us/fligh ... index.html

But negligence that results in a crash, even when causing death, never results in criminal charges.

Why is that?

Straw-man much? You are a riot. Almost certainly the crew screwed up. Big time. That doesn’t make them evil or not worth of empathy. And nobody said more than the passengers.

I don’t comment on 99% of your posts. And lots of your posts do add value. But I would have ignored this one too, except that it referenced and mischaracterized my own comment.

[pelmet]

Unfortunately we will never see the detail in the final report that would be present in a report published by the NTSB. I'm sure our investigators are top shelf, however the final reports published by the TSB are full of word salad, and short on detail.

TSB vs NTSB

Worlds apart.

Hopefully, Trump will demand details be released like the CVR and training records. I have no faith in the TSB anymore with their woke hiring practices to honestly investigate any preferential hiring practices. Do I trust Trump on the opposite side? No but a simple release of documents and recordings for us to read will be fine.

[Rooster69]

I mean we all bullshit, enhance, pencil-whip, etc to get ahead in the industry

Really? Speak for yourself

Ah, no. Most do not.

[pdw]

The go-around (left wing touch) incident last nite in NY is similar crosswind from left (ASN: CRJ 900 mar16).

[Eric Janson]

The go-around (left wing touch) incident last nite in NY is similar crosswind from left (ASN: CRJ 900 mar16).

https://avherald.com/h?article=5255818c&opt=4606

Same company - could easily have ended the same way.

I'd be curious to see how much damage there was.

Seems to be an issue with crosswind landings at this company. Either a skills or a training issue.

[Dry Guy]

Would you guys feel safe getting on a regional jet these days? Something is wrong.

[cdnavater]

The go-around (left wing touch) incident last nite in NY is similar crosswind from left (ASN: CRJ 900 mar16).

https://avherald.com/h?article=5255818c&opt=4606

Same company - could easily have ended the same way.

I'd be curious to see how much damage there was.

Seems to be an issue with crosswind landings at this company. Either a skills or a training issue.

I did notice in the YYZ video that they had a side slip, at Jazz it’s the crab technique and in the AOM it says it must be this technique, same aircraft so I’m not sure why they would use the side slip. Max angle of bank on landing is 10 degrees, if after the crab the touchdown is delayed

[Canoehead]

https://avherald.com/h?article=5255818c&opt=4606

Same company - could easily have ended the same way.

I'd be curious to see how much damage there was.

Seems to be an issue with crosswind landings at this company. Either a skills or a training issue.

100% agree Eric, but it's certainly not limited to Endeavor.

Since around the mid to late 2000's, it seems to me that flight schools started putting crosswind limits on both solo and dual training flights (well below airframe limitations). Some were sorta reasonable, but I've also heard of some downright silly low limits. As a result we have had many pilots coming into industry who have never been permitted to fly in an environment where they can learn proper technique, nor learn of their own personal limits. Even at the airlines (mine at least), we have had to impose crosswind limits on First Officers until they have X amount of time on the airplane. These were limits that generally didn't exist when we were trained to fly. I'm thankful that I was taught by instructors who knew their own limits, and therefore would encourage and coach me through crosswinds at or, in some cases, beyond the demonstrated crosswind components of the airplane. Then we went "north" and operated in some pretty gnarly conditions because we simply had to.

Pilots who have never had these opportunities are obvious (to me at least).

Level D simulators are great for programming in a wind, but they are by no means real world. You have that comfort of knowing you're bolted to the floor with the crash-inhibit enabled; no amount of simulator training completely prepares a new pilot for the real thing

Stable approach and landing technique in the 705/121 world is a concern, especially with low time pilots from the past 10 years or so.

[pdw]

Pilots who have never had these opportunities are obvious

An instructor now that can do those same good old max crosswind demos on a windy day such as I still have in mind … which then got practised too (without any fear I can say) … so ..these don’t exist any more in the curriculum ?

[digits_]

Pilots who have never had these opportunities are obvious

An instructor now that can do those same good old max crosswind demos on a windy day such as I still have in mind … which then got practised too (without any fear I can say) … so ..these don’t exist any more in the curriculum ?

I think transport should step in there. If you can't land the plane at max demonstrated crosswind, you shouldn't get your license. It's becoming the industry norm to have all these limitations. Ridiculous.

Even more ridiculous in the 703+ level. If you don't trust your FOs to pand at max demonstrated crosswind, train them better. Otherwise the first time an FO will land in that crosswind is as PIC 2 years later. In what world is that situation more desirable.

[rookiepilot]

Pilots who have never had these opportunities are obvious

An instructor now that can do those same good old max crosswind demos on a windy day such as I still have in mind … which then got practised too (without any fear I can say) … so ..these don’t exist any more in the curriculum ?

I think transport should step in there. If you can't land the plane at max demonstrated crosswind, you shouldn't get your license. It's becoming the industry norm to have all these limitations. Ridiculous.

Even more ridiculous in the 703+ level. If you don't trust your FOs to pand at max demonstrated crosswind, train them better. Otherwise the first time an FO will land in that crosswind is as PIC 2 years later. In what world is that situation more desirable.

Agreed. Any competent 172 pilot can land one in the conditions that existed that day. Inconceivable a jet at many times the weight would be that much of a challenge as to create an accident.

[pelmet]

https://avherald.com/h?article=5255818c&opt=4606

Same company - could easily have ended the same way.

I'd be curious to see how much damage there was.

Seems to be an issue with crosswind landings at this company. Either a skills or a training issue.

100% agree Eric, but it's certainly not limited to Endeavor.

Since around the mid to late 2000's, it seems to me that flight schools started putting crosswind limits on both solo and dual training flights (well below airframe limitations). Some were sorta reasonable, but I've also heard of some downright silly low limits. As a result we have had many pilots coming into industry who have never been permitted to fly in an environment where they can learn proper technique, nor learn of their own personal limits. Even at the airlines (mine at least), we have had to impose crosswind limits on First Officers until they have X amount of time on the airplane. These were limits that generally didn't exist when we were trained to fly. I'm thankful that I was taught by instructors who knew their own limits, and therefore would encourage and coach me through crosswinds at or, in some cases, beyond the demonstrated crosswind components of the airplane. Then we went "north" and operated in some pretty gnarly conditions because we simply had to.

Pilots who have never had these opportunities are obvious (to me at least).

Level D simulators are great for programming in a wind, but they are by no means real world. You have that comfort of knowing you're bolted to the floor with the crash-inhibit enabled; no amount of simulator training completely prepares a new pilot for the real thing

Stable approach and landing technique in the 705/121 world is a concern, especially with low time pilots from the past 10 years or so.

It is a bit if a double-edged sword for the flight schools. I agree that there are overly strict limits on crosswinds at times and have been the victim of overly cautious instructors refusing to authorize a flight due to a crosswind. It was a LSA Sling 2 that I was flying on a layover and it was breezy. Mention of my experience when the crosswind was out of limits had zero influence. But the official wind direction changed ten degrees after about an hour and suddenly all was OK to fly even though it was really pretty much the same.

On the other hand, there is no shortage of accidents with students smashing up aircraft, making flight schools reluctant to authorize such a flight. I don't blame them. While you might have noticed that I make a lot of posts about accidents, I almost never post one involving a student as I feel there is little to learn from an accident involving someone who typically, barely has any experience(I say typically as I know of a pilot pushing 300 flights with an instructor that has never been allowed to solo and another one that was flying all kinds of high performance aircraft that he owned on a student permit).

Perhaps it would be best to try to ensure that pilots get some strong crosswind training with an instructor at some point. I remember back in the day having gotten my private pilot's licence with minimal crosswind experience. That makes them even more intimidating. I took the initiative and booked a flight with an instructor on a strong crosswind day for touch and goes. That built up confidence. I suspect most pilots in the same position don't do this, but it is something I recommend.

[enbt]

The same goes for all types of marginal weather, not just crosswinds. Flight schools don’t want the liability so it falls to the first employer to train their new hire on things they should already be competent at.

[Dry Guy]

The same goes for all types of marginal weather, not just crosswinds. Flight schools don’t want the liability so it falls to the first employer to train their new hire on things they should already be competent at.

Exactly. Lots of new instrument rated FOs cannot hold straight and level in actual IMC.

[CpnCrunch]

Exactly. Lots of new instrument rated FOs cannot hold straight and level in actual IMC.

When/why are you hand flying in IMC?

[goingnowherefast]

Autopilot breaks. Lots of stuff other can break that means the autopilot can't be used either.

It shouldn't be much to ask when one has to hand fly from cruise to the gate after auto calls it quits.

[rookiepilot]

The same goes for all types of marginal weather, not just crosswinds. Flight schools don’t want the liability so it falls to the first employer to train their new hire on things they should already be competent at.

Exactly. Lots of new instrument rated FOs cannot hold straight and level in actual IMC.

Brutal.

[cdnavater]

Preliminary report to be released today! Must be pressure from the NTSB

[pdw]

But the official wind direction changed ten degrees after about an hour and suddenly all was OK to fly even though it was really pretty much the same.

Sure, that might be a great example of someone’s wisdom there to first wait a bit until recognizing it trending ‘less’ and then (esp seeing the wind field remaining/getting steadier) take opportunity to depart with some extra confidence there isn’t that rogue gust around to overwhelm the limits during the taxi out.

[ant_321]

Exactly. Lots of new instrument rated FOs cannot hold straight and level in actual IMC.

When/why are you hand flying in IMC?

There are plenty of clapped out 703/704 machines flying around without autopilot. I have over 3000hrs hand bombing a 1900 and a lot of that was IMC.

[JasonE]

"Statement from Chair of TSB - Preliminary Report on Endeavor Air CRJ900 accident at Toronto Pearson"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4T1ar9K5n7w

Good explanation of the process, not any new information.

[Canoehead]

https://youtu.be/ChuQOwTV4LQ?si=XbNz7TvU2slIvq7k

https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-repo ... inary.html

A bit more here.

[JustaCanadian]

PF chopped the thrust at 150 ft with an increasing performance wind shift. Then forgot to fly the thing the rest of the way down. Didn’t add any thrust, didn’t flare. PM didn’t recognize this, both seem to ignore the sink rate EGPWS alert. Hit the runway at 1000+ ft a min decent rate.